Unless Christians can see God's hand in the preservation of His written Word through the wealth of manuscripts from all regions and all ages, and in directing circumstances to bring about the translation known as the Authorized Version (the KJB), they will never understand why it has remained the most durable and widely used Bible in countries where English is the common language. Even though many of the translators were Puritans (Calvinists) they did not allow their theology to twist the translation, and because there were almost 50 translators involved, the chances of one or two influencing the outcome was minimal. At the same time all these men were devout and learned Christians, with expertise in the various languages, and with a tremendous regard and reverence for the Word of God.
Christians today will also not understand why all the conservative Christian commentaries which exist today are based upon the King James Bible -- not the Geneva Bible or any other of the older English translations. And none of those commentators even hinted that this translation had been manipulated, or somehow corrupted, and was unworthy of their attention.
God's hand was upon this translation and the translators, since their primary goal was to faithfully translate from Hebrew and Greek, using all existing manuscripts, as well as translations in various languages. And out of many good translations, make one OUTSTANDING translation (as noted in their Preface).
They also noted that the Greek Septuagint (LXX) was quite deficient as a translation: "...that the Seventy were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to add to the Original, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sense thereof according to the truth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance."
So if this was their comment on the LXX, can one really believe that the same translators would turn around and add to or subtract from the original?
Having addressed the objections to their bringing forth a new translation, these men plainly stated their objective: "But it is high time to leave them, and to show in brief what we proposed to ourselves, and what course we held in this our perusal and survey of the Bible. Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one... but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavor, that our mark. To that purpose there were many chosen, that were greater in other men's eyes than in their own, and that sought the truth rather than their own praise. "
Scholars of the English language are convinced that the King James bible molded the English language, and many phrases and quotations from it passed into the common language. They also acknowledge this Bible as a classic of English literature, to be valued for its beauty and its power.
Too many Christians today do not understand that the Reformation Bibles (including the KJB) were under serious attack by the Catholic Church (and the KJB is still under attack), because they had such a tremendous impact on Christianity and the Western world. But then in the 18th and 19th centuries rationalistic and skeptical critics (primarily German) began their attacks on the underlying texts of the Bible (as well as the Bible itself), and everything came to a head through the work of Westcott & Hort in England to (1) thoroughly undermine the text of the New Testament with a fanciful theory known as the Westcott/Hort Theory, and (2) replace the traditional Received Text (which they hated) with a new critical text based upon a HANDFUL of corrupt manuscripts -- Aleph, A, B, C, D, and a few others. This is essentially the same critical text in use today. Thus the movement for corrupted modern Bible versions began in 1881, and continued through the 20th century. Many changes have great doctrinal significance but only those with spiritual insight will see this.
Christians today will also not understand why all the conservative Christian commentaries which exist today are based upon the King James Bible -- not the Geneva Bible or any other of the older English translations. And none of those commentators even hinted that this translation had been manipulated, or somehow corrupted, and was unworthy of their attention.
God's hand was upon this translation and the translators, since their primary goal was to faithfully translate from Hebrew and Greek, using all existing manuscripts, as well as translations in various languages. And out of many good translations, make one OUTSTANDING translation (as noted in their Preface).
They also noted that the Greek Septuagint (LXX) was quite deficient as a translation: "...that the Seventy were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to add to the Original, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sense thereof according to the truth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance."
So if this was their comment on the LXX, can one really believe that the same translators would turn around and add to or subtract from the original?
Having addressed the objections to their bringing forth a new translation, these men plainly stated their objective: "But it is high time to leave them, and to show in brief what we proposed to ourselves, and what course we held in this our perusal and survey of the Bible. Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one... but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavor, that our mark. To that purpose there were many chosen, that were greater in other men's eyes than in their own, and that sought the truth rather than their own praise. "
Scholars of the English language are convinced that the King James bible molded the English language, and many phrases and quotations from it passed into the common language. They also acknowledge this Bible as a classic of English literature, to be valued for its beauty and its power.
Too many Christians today do not understand that the Reformation Bibles (including the KJB) were under serious attack by the Catholic Church (and the KJB is still under attack), because they had such a tremendous impact on Christianity and the Western world. But then in the 18th and 19th centuries rationalistic and skeptical critics (primarily German) began their attacks on the underlying texts of the Bible (as well as the Bible itself), and everything came to a head through the work of Westcott & Hort in England to (1) thoroughly undermine the text of the New Testament with a fanciful theory known as the Westcott/Hort Theory, and (2) replace the traditional Received Text (which they hated) with a new critical text based upon a HANDFUL of corrupt manuscripts -- Aleph, A, B, C, D, and a few others. This is essentially the same critical text in use today. Thus the movement for corrupted modern Bible versions began in 1881, and continued through the 20th century. Many changes have great doctrinal significance but only those with spiritual insight will see this.
